liberation

NZ Politics Daily: 24 May

The race has already begun to attach a folksy label to this year’s Budget and capture in two or three words what it’s all about. John Armstrong’s bid for the title is ‘sweet and sour’, reflecting how each unpalatable cut is balanced with a sweetener. He thinks this approach has worked so far and that with the outcry over cuts and increased charges effectively minimised, today’s fare will be fairly bland – see: 'Sweet and sour' approach averts Budget outcry. 

 

‘Bach, boat and beemer’ is Patrick Gower’s pick for an catchy handle, reflecting Bill English’s hint that he will be closing down on tax loopholes such as tax write-offs for holiday homes – see: Bach, boat and beemer targeted in Budget. Such measures will make easy headlines for English and make it easy for headline writers. But the measure is unlikely to harvest large amounts of extra revenue or cause real concern for the most affluent New Zealanders. [Read more below]

 

Post-Budget analysis: "The Yawn Budget"

The race to name the Budget seems to have been won by Vernon Small: it’s ‘The Yawn Budget’ (http://bit.ly/JpaZwL). There’s many variations on this theme that have been announced today by various pundits and political players. John Armstrong labels it A most forgettable (and dull) Budget (http://bit.ly/JpcPh5), and uses words such as ‘forgettable’, ‘dull’, ‘boring’. Bernard Hickey seems to call it ‘The Steady-as-she-goes Budget’ (http://bit.ly/Jpbmr5). Herald business editor Liam Dann (@liamdann) (http://bit.ly/JpbAyC) has tweeted that it’s ‘The Seinfeld Budget’ i.e. ‘A Show about Nothing’. Political strategist Mark Blackham ‏(@mark_blackham) (http://bit.ly/JpiZ0X) has tweeted to say that it’s The "plain pack" Budget i.e. as with plan packing of cigarettes, ‘No National branding, but we all know what's inside’. [Read more below]

Geoffrey Miller: Is taking gifts from lobbyists ever a good idea?

David Shearer has defended taking free hospitality from SkyCity at the Rugby World Cup by saying he didn't know at the time about the ‘convention centre for pokie machines deal’. If this is really true, then Shearer is, at the very least, guilty of incompetence, as the deal was announced in June 2011 and he is an Auckland MP. The deal was covered by the media at the time in June 2011. The alternative is somewhat worse for Shearer, namely that he was in fact fully aware of the news of the deal in June 2011, but somehow, in May 2012, fell victim to the rather contagious and virulent malady spreading through the New Zealand parliament: the 'cannot recall' disease. In this guest blog post, Geoffrey Miller warns against politicians receiving corporate gifts and says they should declare them more quickly than they do. [Read more below].

 

NZ Politics Daily: 23 May

Is Labour still fighting last year’s election? David Shearer’s limited announcements on economic policy have carefully been aimed to boost Labour’s image as a fiscally responsible government-in-waiting. This clearly constrains them as they attack the Government’s Budget tomorrow. The problem may be that the world has moved on and ‘fiscal responsibility’ is becoming synonymous with ‘austerity’ – policies that are becoming economically and politically less fashionable by the day. There is clearly a majority of voters who think the Government has got it wrong or are unsure about the current economic approach according to Vernon Small and Tracy Watkins (see: Support for economic direction wavering). This would suggest there is fertile ground for a credible economic alternative, and there is no doubt Labour has plenty of ammunition with which to attack the Government. But they also need to provide a strong point of difference in order to be seen as a real alternative government. [Read more below]

 

NZ Politics Daily: 22 May

Quickly accumulating unwanted baggage is a reality for most travellers. On his journey towards the Beehive’s 9th floor David Shearer, the ‘non-politician’ elected with no political baggage, is quickly getting weighed down. Shearer’s office, along with Government politicians, are no doubt poring over the Labour Leader’s previous statements about political corruption in light of the daily revelations about Shane Jones’ involvement with William Yan (aka Bill Liu), currently on trial in Auckland. Revelations in court yesterday show the link goes further than just Jones, as Shane Phillips (also known as Shane Te Pou), a professional Labour Party fundraiser, had close links with Mr Yan, taking Yan on a trip to Hawke’s Bay which included a visit with then Labour Internal Affairs minister Rick Barker. His brother also worked in Shane Jones’ office. Phillips claims to have filled in a citizenship form on behalf of Mr Yan, the accuracy of which is central to the prosecution – see: Edward Gay’s Millionaire knew immigration statements were untrue, court told. The article, along with others – such as Jared Savage’s Labour links to Yan emerge in court – illustrate how well-connected Yan was to the Labour Party. [Read more below]

 

NZ Politics Daily: 21 May

Jobs and growth versus fiscal responsibility - that’s the major dichotomy characterising political analysis and debate in the lead up to this week’s Budget. Brian Fallow asks today in the Herald, ‘Which is the economy’s biggest problem right now: too much debt or not enough work to go around?  That is the basic question the Government faced as it prepared this week’s Budget’ – see: Dealing with debt key to recovery. Similarly, today’s Herald editorial says ‘Governments around the world are in the same dilemma: whether to give lacklustre economies an even greater stimulus or demonstrate budgetary control’ – see: Budget likely to test resolve on economy. This Government has clearly chosen in favour of fiscal responsibility, and that’s going to be the key message pushed all week. 

 

In contrast, Labour, the Greens, and other critics are going to be pushing for a priority to be placed on creating economic growth – and to a lesser extent, jobs. You can see a foretaste of this in David Shearer’s very nice catchphrase: A ‘zero Budget this week is a recipe for zero growth’ – see: Adam Bennett’s Zero Budget means zero growth – Shearer. John Armstrong also says that the focus of debate ‘will shift to the adequacy or otherwise of National's economic growth strategy’ – see: Backlash lurking in Govt austerity march. According to Armstrong, National is going to have to rely on ‘Steven "Minister of Everything" Joyce’ and his new super-ministry to create the required growth and jobs. Labour’s not alone in pushing for greater job creation, interestingly, Business New Zealand’s Chief executive Phil O'Reilly has called for a ‘much sharper focus on job creation’ – see RNZ’s Business NZ to hold Govt to its goal of returning to surplus. [Read more below]

NZ Politics Daily: 18 May

The Judith Collins defamation action is starting to look like a cross between the Teapot tapes and the McLibel trial. The Minister has finally filed the legal proceedings against Labour MPs Trevor Mallard and Andrew Little who, for their part, both seem determined to milk it for all it’s worth – see the two items by Danya Levy: MPs laugh off Collins' lawsuit and Little tells Collins to send in the 'thugs'. Clearly Little and Mallard sense that this legal action can only embarrass the Minister and her Government, and are set on turning the process into a circus with their hijinks, bluster, and jovial disregard for the matter. 

 

Graeme Edgeler writes in his blogpost, Sanctuary!, that being ‘served’ your legal papers is a rather quaint, bizarre and ‘fun’ part of the whole procedure, so who can blame the Labour MPs for enjoying the theatrics. But he takes issue with the notion that MPs cannot be served defamation proceedings while in the Parliamentary complex due to parliamentary privilege. Instead Edgeler suggests that ‘unless they’re planning on being unfindable for next couple of years, it might be better to get it over with. If the case is as likely as they claim to prove embarrassing for the Minister, one might wonder why they don’t want to bring it on’. Furthermore, as Adam Bennett reports in Little out to embarrass Collins over court action, ‘should the pair avoid being served in person several times, lawyers could apply for a court order allowing the papers to be simply taped to their front doors’. [Read more below]

 

NZ politicians on gay marriage (on the record)

Recently we have seen some New Zealand party leaders and MPs come out in support of same-sex marriage – albeit often with qualifications. When I interviewed politicians in my Vote Chat series last year, I asked them about this issue, and their responses can be viewed on YouTube. In the blog post below, I summarise their responses and provide links through to the particular video clips where they give their views on gay marriage. I also roughly rank the various politicians who participated in Vote Chat – from those that were most enthusiastic in supporting marriage equality through to those that clearly oppose allowing same-sex couples to marry. [Read more below]

  

John Moore: Language chauvinism, Maori nationalism and the demonisation of the ‘other’ in New Zealand

A sizeable minority of New Zealanders are ‘annoyed’ or even ‘repulsed’ by the apparent proliferation of shop signs in ‘foreign’ languages. So, what could be a reason or explanation behind this sense of anguish felt over a few shop signs written in Chinese and other ‘foreign’ scripts? This phenomenon of anxiety, and even pathological hatred, felt towards the ‘other’ is not unique to this country, and is in fact part of a global rise of xenophobic, nativist and nationalistic responses to ‘globalization’. However, perhaps unique to this country, such views are currently being promoted by the left in alliance with Maori nationalists, rather than by a populist right. And alongside this leftwing promotion of anti-foreigner politics, we are seeing a transformation of tino rangatiratanga ideology, where a synthesis is occurring of Maori nationalism and traditional pakeha/white nationalism. In this guest blog, John Moore explains why racist and nationalist views continue to have resonance in modern Aotearoa and argues that the left must unambiguously reject such irrational reactions to a rapidly changing world. 

NZ Politics Daily: 17 May

The most significant education reforms since David Lange’s Tomorrow’s Schools in 1988? An attack on teachers? A focus on quality versus quantity? A slight change in student-teacher ratios? Or the thin edge of the wedge? These are the arguments flying around today over Hekia Parata’s announcement signaling changes to primary and secondary education. The proposals have instantly incurred the wrath of many organised elements of the education sector, including the New Zealand Principals' Federation, Secondary Principals Councils, Post Primary Teachers' Association, Canterbury Primary Principals' Association, and the NZ Educational Institute – joined, naturally, by Labour and the Greens – see Kate Shuttleworth’s Sharp response to planned class size changes. 

 

So has National launched a political assault on the education sector and, if so, is it bravery or stupidity? There are parts of the sector – such as the School Trustees Association and some educationalists - who support the basic ideas proposed by Parata. What’s more, in terms of the particularly controversial matter of performance pay for teachers, the latest Herald survey 63 per cent of respondents supported it. For other useful coverage of the issue, see: Tina Law and John Hartevelt’s Bad report card for bigger classes, Teuila Fuatai and Vaimoana Tapaleao’s Move to larger classes sparks alarm, and the Herald editorial: Size matters, but excellence even more so. Meanwhile, in the tertiary sector, changes in the governance of universities are also being proposed, and today Sandra Grey of the TEU argues that ‘Corporate-style boards will undermine the independence of universities and their staff’ – see: Tertiary governance changes suspect. [read more below]

 

NZ Politics Daily: 16 May

The media should hold politicians to account, and politicians should be wary of the media – that’s the golden rule of political communications. Democracy and politics are best served by a healthy distance and tension between MPs and those who report on and analyse them. It is far more problematic when the two institutions get too cosy – as we have witnessed in the British tabloid hacker-gate scandal in which media moguls, editors and journalists have been exposed as being incredibly close to prime ministers, politicians and spin doctors. 

 

In that case we should probably be pleased to see that John Key has been venting his spleen at various journalists and describing the media as increasing hostile, aggressive and antagonistic towards him. Of course this doesn’t mean that his criticisms of the media are accurate or fair, and there has been some interesting reactions. The best response to Key’s media moan has come from Paul Buchannan writing on the Kiwipolitico blog – see: Whining John. While lambasting Key, Buchannan actually agrees with the Prime Minister’s observation that the press has turned against him to some degree. This is a welcome development according to Buchannan, who says that the media gave Key the ‘press equivalent of a free pass for the first three years in spite of often equivocal, deceptive or disingenuous answers to anything other than patsy question’. Furthermore, Buchannan argues that the changing orientation of the media is largely a response to Key’s own actions – in particular his conduct during the ‘teapot tape’ saga where he attempted ‘to have the photographer prosecuted, following on his defamatory and/or contemptuous treatment of individual members of the press corps’. What’s more, Buchannan notes a change in Key’s demeanour: ‘Slowly but surely, as each new mini-scandal or crisis was revealed, Mr. Key began to drop his smile and wave optimism and replaced it with a surly, if not seething disdain for his questioners. Although he keeps his nice persona sharp for staged interviews on TV and radio, his guard drops when doing the impromptu stand-up Q&A with the press gallery’. 

 

Swift responses to Key came, interestingly, from the Herald editors – who instantly hit back on Twitter. Herald Editor-in-Chief Tim Murphy (@tmurphyNZH) dismissed the gripes as ‘a 2nd term thing’. And Herald Editor Shayne Currie (@ShayneCurrieNZH) said ‘We wouldn't want to be populist now would we Mr Key’, and in reference to British hacker-gate scandal, said ‘I guess I won't be getting LOL texts’. 

 

The best single item covering the story is Key denies slamming NZ media. Adam Bennett’s Key backs off comments on 'Herald' in media gripe also provides the responses of some other politicians – the most interesting being from the staunchly anti-media Winston Peters: ‘Mr Peters said the Herald, like other media, had been "absolute poodles" towards Mr Key during his Government's first term.  But he offered the media his blessing for their more aggressive approach now’. TVNZ also reported later that day, ‘John Key said the nation's media "were doing well" when he was confronted with a barrage of journalists in Wellington’ – see: Key told to harden up after media moan. For other responses see: Duncan Garner’s Media's 'hostile' behaviour natural – Key, the Wanganui Chronicle’s Huff a bad look for PM, and David Farrar’s Keys actual comments on the media.

 

So is there a 'tabloidisation' going on in New Zealand’s media? Academic media expert (and former Herald editor) Gavin Ellis gives his view about this in an interview on Newstalk ZB. Larry Williams also discussed the issue in an interview with Barry Soper. 

 

John Key could well cite two examples from the Herald today to bolster his case that the media is becoming more critical of his Government. The first is in Claire Trevett’s front-page story, MP Spending: Big bucks on travel. This details ‘The latest release of ministerial credit card details - covering the first three months of this year’ and reveals that Tim ‘Groser ran up a $10,829 hotel bill for a week in Switzerland - about $1345 a night’. The biggest ministerial spenders on international travel were: Murray McCully ($110,637), Tim Groser ($87,970) and Jonathan Coleman ($42,012).

 

More significantly, David Fisher keeps digging for dirt on the BanksDotcom scandal, and today he has come up with yet more material that, in the public interest, deserves publication – see: Banks promised Dotcom aid: Email and Hong Kong hospitality warmly received. The first story about the promises that John Banks allegedly made to Dotcom is particularly damning. It provides further details about what might be seen as ‘cash for political influence’ both before and after Banks’ election to Parliament and appointment as a minister in the current government. Fisher has got hold of emails written by Kim Dotcom's head of security that allegedly record what John Banks had offered to Dotcom. When asking for a donation to the Act Party, Banks apparently promised ‘he would be a "very good friend" once he was back in Parliament, according to an email’. In terms of Dotcom’s declined OIO request to buy his mansion, Banks also allegedly ‘said "once in government" he "would have the power to do something about it"’. And perhaps most damning of all – after being elected to the current Parliament – one email relays Banks making the following offer: ‘He [said he] would like to sit down with you in the new year to talk about how he can be a service to [you] and the family now [he] is back as an MP’. For more analysis of what the latest revelations might mean, see The Standard’s Emails reveal Key & Banks’ Dotcom links. 

There’s praise and blame being heaped on the Government’s plans to raise pharmaceutical prescription prices. Criticism can be seen in TVNZ’s Health experts plead for rethink on prescription price hike and Gordon Campbell’s On the rise in prescription charges. While editorials in the Herald and Dominion Post are sympathetic – see: Angst at rise in script fees misdirected and No sugar coating for prescription charges. Both editorials note that New Zealand prescriptions remain relatively cheap by international standards. The Herald make a case, however, for the prices to be even higher but offset by a lower ‘trigger point for free prescriptions’. 

Next week’s Budget is looking increasingly black for some sectors. The Government continues to pre-announce some of the potentially controversial elements, the latest being: Bigger class sizes announced and the fact that ‘the Government is working on performance pay for teachers’. John Hartevelt has written a good piece on the ‘money-shuffling’ going on – see: About this budget.... Hartevelt notes ‘that the Government is running out of obvious money-saving targets in the public service and has been forced to move on to finding money-raising options…. [and] looks to have wound up wringing the revenue it needs from growing user charges’. For further forecasts on what might be in next Thursday’s announcements, see also BusinessDesk’s Budget spotlight on 'sin taxes' and property.

Other important or interesting political items today include:

 

• Maori Television broadcast a special ‘Native Affairs’ episode this week about the Urewera controversy, which you can watch here. For some interesting commentary on the issue, see Morgan Godfery’s Native Affairs on the Urewera "terrorists", Stephen Franks’s Urewera 4 and the Supreme Court, and Joshua Hitchcock’s Once More On The Urewera 4. Interestingly, Franks is full of praise for the episode of Native Affairs, and Hitchcock expresses strong reservations about the actions of the Urewera defendants.
• Paula Bennett has announced what she calls the Government's new ‘investment approach’ to welfare, with the establishment of a business-focused new board to give advice and support to the MSD chief executive and the Minister – see: Danya Levy’s Rebstock appointment to welfare reform board concerns. Gordon Campbell raises some critical concerns. 
• TVNZ is no longer a public broadcaster, and hence it believes it shouldn’t be forced to screen political party electioneering advertisements for free – see: Paul McBeth’s Electioneering puts TVNZ at 'commercial disadvantage'. 
• The Green Party’s Claire Browning has written a book on the history of her party – and it will be launched to coincide with the 40th anniversary of the Values Party (the precursor to the Greens) – see: Beyond Today: a values story, and the Greens’ story. Browning warns her comrades: ‘It says one thing some members won’t like. The Greens are an ecological economic party, a party that puts the environment first, not a party of the Left’.

 

Below are the internet links to all the NZ politics material from the last 24 hours that are either informative, insightful, interesting or influential. This list and the links are taken from a fuller document, NZ Politics Daily, which is emailed out, Monday to Friday, to various researchers, academics, journalists, MPs and so forth. The document is purely for research purposes only, and if you would like to be on the subscription list, please email: bryce.edwards@otago.ac.nz

 

PM criticises media

Newstalk ZB, APNZ, Herald: Key denies slamming NZ media

Newstalk ZB: Key slams news media (+ video)

Adam Bennett (Herald): Key backs off comments on 'Herald' in media gripe

TVNZ: Key told to harden up after media moan

TV3: Key: Media 'aggressive and hostile' toward Govt

Duncan Garner (TV3): Media's 'hostile' behaviour natural – Key

Alex Tarrant (Herald): Key takes aim at hostile, aggressive and antagonistic media

David Farrar (Kiwiblog): Keys actual comments on the media

Paul Buchannan (Kiwipolitico): Whining John.

Anthony Robins (Standard): Better late than never

Wanganui Chronicle: Huff a bad look for PM

BanksDotcom

David Fisher (Herald): Banks promised Dotcom aid: Email

David Fisher (Herald): Hong Kong hospitality warmly received

Newswire: Email confirms Banks got donation from Dotcom

The Standard: Emails reveal Key & Banks’ Dotcom links

 

Prescription charges

TVNZ: Health experts plead for rethink on prescription price hike

Gordon Campbell (Scoop): On the rise in prescription charges

Herald: Editorial: Angst at rise in script fees misdirected

Dom Post: Editorial: No sugar coating for prescription charges

TV3: User-pay charges will harm Kiwis - Green Party

Melody Brandon (NBR): New Zealanders happy to pay up to $9 for prescriptions

No Right Turn: A bitter pill

 

Budget

John Hartevelt (Stuff): About this budget...

BusinessDesk’s Budget spotlight on 'sin taxes' and property

Rob Salmond (Pundit): Lies, damned lies, and National party spin-doctoring

John Hartevelt (Stuff): Bigger class sizes announced

Kate Shuttleworth (Herald): Minister: Classroom sizes to grow

Tim Hazledine (Herald): Downsizing will ensure top quality

 

Welfare reform

Herald/APNZ: Minister defends new welfare board

Danya Levy (Stuff): Rebstock appointment to welfare reform board concerns

Newswire: Bradford slams new reforms board

RNZ: Minister defends Rebstock appointment to board

Felix Marwick (Newstalk ZB): Balance of new welfare board questioned

Gordon Campbell (Scoop): On Paula Rebstock and her new welfare reform platform

 

Broadcasting

Herald: Funeral procession protest for TVNZ7

Tom Pullar-Strecker (Stuff): Nearly half of homes watch Freeview – survey

Tom Pullar-Strecker (Stuff): Sky shares fall on ComCom news

Esther Goh (idealog): Igloo gets the green light but Sky under scrutiny

Tom Frewen (Scoop): Strongman Mine Doco - Another Disaster at NZ on Air?

Tim Selwyn (Tumeke): NZ On Air can't ad

Russell Brown (Public Address): Disrupting the Television

 

Urewera case

Morgan Godfery (Maui Street) Native Affairs on the Urewera "terrorists"

Stephen Franks: Urewera 4 and the Supreme Court

Joshua Hitchcock (Maori Law and Politics): Once More On The Urewera 4

 

Other

Claire Trevett (Herald): MP Spending: Big bucks on travel

Paul McBeth (NBR): Electioneering puts TVNZ at 'commercial disadvantage'

Claire Browning (Frogblog): Beyond Today: a values story, and the Greens’ story

Fran O’Sullivan (Herald): Anxious time for super man

Stuff: 'NZ Inc' stretches legs in new digs

Danya Levy (Stuff): Consultancy's part in review questioned

Press: Editorial: Ruling's wide reach

Newswire: PSA welcomes budget boost

Andrea Vance (Stuff): Conservative Craig in demand as agony aunt

Lincoln Tan and Hayden Donnell (Herald): Ethnic signs: Poll confirms Kiwis uncomfortable

Manawatu Standard: Editorial: When, not if

Charlie Gates (Stuff): Christ Church Cathedral rescue bid rejected

The Political Scientist: Under cover, under hand and under the radar – ‘all about sport’ in Christchurch

Martyn Bradbury (Tumeke): Let David Cunliffe speak on TV3's 'The Nation' Facebook group

The Standard: Much ado about nothing

Robert Winter (Idle Thoughts): Jordan Carter on the Labour Party Reorganisation

Eric Crampton (Offsetting Behaviour): A useful lottery

Newswire: McCully to lobby for UN council seat

Jamie Morton (Herald): $2m for police informants an 'essential' cost

Dan Parker (TV3): Funding squeeze at Te Papa

Nikki Preston (Herald): Social agencies seek halt to pensioner housing sale

David Farrar (Kiwiblog): Regional Approval ratings

Stuff: Today in politics: Wednesday, May 16

Audio coverage of politics

 

 

John Moore: The Cunliffe Conspiracy

David Shearer is a dead man walking. That is, his failure to reconnect a cynical electorate with Labour means that his continuation as party leader is untenable. So, is David Cunliffe once again vying for the big job?  And with his recent ‘anti-Shearer’ speech calling for the party to more strongly differentiate itself from National, do we have a full-blown conspiracy in our midst? Are a group of Labour insiders planning to take hold of the organisation and push it to the left? In this guest blogpost, John Moore speculates on plotting against the Labour leader, and asks what this all really means for the trajectory of the party?

 

Geoffrey Miller: Has John Banks breached the Act Party constitution and rules?

Currently the Act Party is attempting to distance itself from the ‘banks.com’ scandal engulfing its leader. For example after the Dotcom donation allegations became known, Act Party president Chris Simmons told the New Zealand Herald ‘There's a bit of a beat-up going on. It was all to do with the mayoral campaign. It doesn't have anything to do with Act’. But in practical terms, it has become fairly clear that anything to do with John Banks has in fact a great deal to do with Act, given that he is now their sole MP. In this guest blog post, Act-watcher Geoffrey Miller asks whether Banks has formally violated party rules? [Read more below]

 

Geoffrey Miller: The consequences of the John Banks donation scandal

Is it all a damp squib? Or will the Kim Dotcom allegations about John Banks lead to messy by-elections, the death of the Act Party, a boost for the Conservative Party, and other party mergers? The guest blog post below from Act-watcher Geoffrey Miller, delves into the various ramifications, and outlines five possible consequences of the scandal. [Read more below].

 

ACC scandal analysis

The latest chapter in the National Government’s ACC scandal deserves some analysis. And since I provided some analysis last night on TVNZ’s Close Up coverage – which you can watch here – I thought I’d elaborate a bit on some of the points that I made. [Read more below]

NZ Politics Daily: 22 March

John Key has put the Nick Smith ACC scandal behind him, and he wants everyone else to do likewise. However, serious questions remain about corruption, cronyism, the Prime Minister’s own involvement, how Smith could have made such a mistake and whether an independent inquiry is needed. These questions are being widely discussed in the media today, and are surveyed below.

1) What is corruption, and did Nick Smith have to resign due to his corrupt actions as a Minister in the National Government?

‘Corruption’ is generally defined in political science as the use of power by government officials or politicians for illegitimate private gain. Note that ‘corruption’ does not necessarily have to involve illegal activity – it can merely involve breaching public expectations of how officials and politicians should operate.

So, did Nick Smith’s actions cross the line into ‘corruption’? There seems to be a consensus that, in writing a ministerial letter to help his friend Bronwyn Pullar in her negotiations with his own government department, Smith attempted to use his ministerial position to obtain private gain for a friend. Nick Smith’s ACC letters are now available online here, here, here and here.

Vernon Small says that ‘it is difficult to see what Dr Smith's reference would achieve, other than to flex political muscle and indicate she had friends in high places…. From that moment, it was known within ACC that she was a friend of the minister. However professional ACC staff were, it would have been at the back of their minds when dealing with her’ – see: Inquiry inevitable into lapse of judgment by a smart minister.

Newspaper editorials today seem clear that such actions are wrong – for example the ODT: ‘ministers of the Crown should not use their influence to assist friends or family’ (A failure of judgement). TVNZ blogger, Tim Watkin puts it clearly too: ‘Minister's don't get to do favours for friends. Especially not on letterhead…. Whether she's an old friend or an old lover is irrelevant. Minister's can't act for friends’ – see: Nick Smith – A Greek Tragedy of his own making. See also: the Timaru Herald editorial, The right thing to do.

Of course Smith’s resignation due to ‘improper behaviour’ is not this Government’s first ministerial departure: there have now been four serious cases of ministers resigning their warrants due to ‘misuse of their position or improper conduct’ – the others being Richard Worth, Phil Heatley and Pansy Wong – see: Adam Bennett and Amelia Romanos’ Nick Smith resigns over ACC fiasco and the Herald’s Key's Cabinet Hall of Shame.

Key’s Government is in real danger of being tarnished with the reputation for ‘political sleaze’, and labels of ‘cronyism and sleaze’ can be incredibly damaging to a government – as argued today in John Armstrong’s very good column: National's image and ratings take a big hit.

The situation is made worse by the ‘friend’ in question being a former Auckland National Party publicity director, and someone closely connected with the party elite. So if it is not corruption, then Smith’s actions certainly appear to involve cronyism, which the ODT defines today as: ‘being prepared to pull strings to help either friends or politically like-minded individuals’. As Tim Watkin points out, this will be very badly received by others that are not so well-connected with National Party and its ministers: ‘Tens of thousands of New Zealanders have had to wade through ACC claims. A fair chunk of those will have had to fight for one thing or another. They don't get to email their old pal the minister for help, or take their case to several Cabinet ministers, or get meetings with senior managers, or lobby board members.  Pullar shouldn't have received any special assistance or access just because she's well-connected. And clearly she did. Indeed, I reckon that happens quite a lot in this small country and it's not good’.

Incidents like this ACC scandal will not only tarnish this Government’s reputation, but also potentially impact on the country’s international image of being corruption-free. Currently the international anti-corruption agency Transparency International places New Zealand at number one in its global corruption index – a position that is jealously protected by all politicians. Yet it’s clear that a political fight is now in full swing over issues of corruption, and a lot of mud will be thrown as the competition escalates and becomes nastier. Labour, the Greens and New Zealand First are pushing hard on National, but they’ll need to be aware that their own parties might come to suffer from the greater focus on political and personal behaviour.

2) Did the Prime Minister act appropriately over the affair?

John Key clearly attempted to protect Nick Smith and avoid a resignation, which has led to widespread criticism that he failed to deal properly with the scandal as it developed. John Armstrong says that Key has ‘mishandled’ the scandal, as he ‘initially valued loyalty ahead of precaution’. Similarly, Newstalk ZB’s article, Push for inquiry into Smith ACC scandal, outlines the criticisms being made, including that of Labour MP Chris Hipkins: ‘John Key has never been good at managing conflicts of interest. Conflicts of interest are rife in this government and John Key doesn't care about that’. See also, Peter Wilson’s Newswire story, Key in the gun over Smith's resignation, in which Metiria Turei is quoted as saying, ‘John Key delayed until he was trapped and that's not good leadership’.

3) Why would a minister make such a ‘mistake’?

To many commentators it is curious that a senior government minister would take such a risk, or be blind to such a misguided and inappropriate action. For example, Vernon Small, has said, ‘It is simply gob-smacking that Dr Smith would let his guard down and provide the reference after so staunchly and correctly refusing to intercede on her behalf before’. The answer for many seems to relate to the type of relationship that Smith had with Pullar. There’s a number of good articles dealing with her today: Stuff’s The 'friend' and activist linked to Smith's demise, Andrew Koubaridis and Adam Bennett’s Smith scandal: Woman in the storm, and Adam Bennett and Amelia Romanos’ Nick Smith resigns over ACC fiasco. But it is Adam Bennett’s Fresh letter proves last straw for minister that provides the strongest hint or speculation about the nature of the relationship: ‘Commenting later on the events that led to his resignation, Dr Smith did little to dispel speculation that his relationship with Ms Pullar was more than platonic…. Mr Key said he'd had a brief discussion with Dr Smith about his friendship with Ms Pullar.  "I don't need to know the details of that friendship. You either have a conflict of interest or you don't, and he clearly did ... and the nature of the relationship is not really material."’

Clearly if the relationship was an intimate one, then this might go some way to explaining how Smith might have acted so inappropriately. People don’t always act rationally when strong emotions are involved.

4) Should there be an independent inquiry into the ACC scandal?

John Armstrong says ‘Smith's departure will effectively allow Key to shut the door on any kind of inquiry into Smith's behaviour which might embarrass National’. But others disagree – and not just the Opposition parties. Vernon Small says that an inquiry seems ‘inevitable’, and today’s Dominion Post editorial calls for further investigations, as ‘Too many questions remain unanswered’ – see: Govt minister fell short of standards.

There are also calls for an inquiry from some surprising corners: David Farrar says that although an inquiry ‘may not be an attractive option to the Government’, ‘I am now of the view that an independent inquiry, at a minimum, is necessary’ – see: More on the ACC saga. And even Nick Smith is calling for an inquiry (to ‘clear his name’) – this is detailed in the most thorough account and analysis of the scandal: Tracy Watkins and Vernon Small’s Ex-Minister Nick Smith fights to clear name. 

The other must-read item on the scandal is the Dim-Post blog, Smith’s bad dream. In his own highly succinct manner, Danyl Mclauchlan puts forward a very plausible summary of exactly what has occurred in the scandal: ‘Smith had a relationship with Pullar, who then devoted herself to a vendetta against ACC, a department Smith then became the Minister of, which then sent Pullar thousands of confidential case files (under circumstances that are still very murky), which Pullar evidently confronted Smith with in an attempt to reach a settlement.  The settlement obviously didn’t happen, so Pullar leaked the patient files to the media. Pullar’s name was leaked to the media as punishment, either by ACC or their new Minister, Judith Collins, and it’s not hard to guess which of the two is more likely to dish out this sort of punitive vengeance. Presumably Collins was unaware that Smith had intervened in Pullar’s case’.

For a humourous account of the media furore over the scandal, see Scott Yorke’s The ACC Scandal: Live Updates, for discussion of who might eventually replace Nick Smith, see Cameron Slater’s Who should replace Nick Smith?, and for backgrounders on the career of Nick Smith, see the following: Nick Smith: This is your life, Nick Smith's political ups and downs, Nick Smith's chequered political career, Powerful brat pack get back together for wake, and ACC debacle not Smith's first controversy. Finally on this topic, the Greens’ Kevin Hague also asks some important questions about the scandal in his Frogblog post, ACC: what we really need to ask.

Other important items today include: Bernard Orsman’s Port u-turn: Wharfies back to work, Andrea Vance’s McCully presses Foreign Affairs chief, Bryan Gould’s Tougher approach hints this term is Key's last, Chris Trotter’s Is Key descending the same staircase as Muldoon?, and Claire Trevett’s Bright future for political jousting.